Jump to content

Bluetooth Options For 2008 Silverado


Recommended Posts

Posted

So has ANYONE gotten a replacement VCIM with bluetooth to work with On* 100%?

I am hearing a lot of "almosts" and we know how to turn a red LED green, but who has actually gotten 100% confirmed operation of BOTH bluetooth and On?

 

Just got me a tracking number... I will soon be amongst the ranks of the "been there... done that" tribe of bluetooth integration!!!!

  • Replies 735
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Posted
So has ANYONE gotten a replacement VCIM with bluetooth to work with On* 100%?

I am hearing a lot of "almosts" and we know how to turn a red LED green, but who has actually gotten 100% confirmed operation of BOTH bluetooth and On?

 

Just got me a tracking number... I will soon be amongst the ranks of the "been there... done that" tribe of bluetooth integration!!!!

 

As far as I know the only guys to be successful so far in 100% On* account transitions are guys who were able to find a used VCIM from an 09 GM vehicle with an active account and simply live with On* believing they are driving the old 09 GM vehicle.

 

In my case and a couple others on this forum, I believe the swap is technically complete, they just don't want to switch accounts based on an internal policy.

 

Anyone else advise?

Posted
As far as I know the only guys to be successful so far in 100% On* account transitions are guys who were able to find a used VCIM from an 09 GM vehicle with an active account and simply live with On* believing they are driving the old 09 GM vehicle.

 

In my case and a couple others on this forum, I believe the swap is technically complete, they just don't want to switch accounts based on an internal policy.

 

Anyone else advise?

 

I think there are plenty of G8 owners who have gotten full functionality from their new eBay units, but I think most of them are '09 owners and bluetooth was a mid-model year addition on the 2009 G8. I think you're largely right as to the 2007-8 GM trucks, SUVs and Lambda CUVs. It doesn't seem like anybody's having 100% On* success with new units on those.

Posted

Well, my saga with Onstar continues with no real end in sight. Pressed the blue On* button again tonight and waited about 7 minutes for them to answer. This time they answered "Thank you for contacting the Onstar navigation center. Where would you like to go today?" That's a new one - I don't even have the directions & connections plan. So I told them I needed tech assistance and they transferred me. Got a very nice lady who tried to once again activate my service with new phone number. She finally gave up and after about 15 minutes of beeping and phone ringing sounds came back on the line.

 

What she said was interesting, to say the least. She said that she was unable to get it activated and thinks it's because of a software problem on their end. She said "I don't think it's a hardware problem" - unlike the other techs I've spoken to who immediately blamed the hardware even though my On* light is green indicating that all systems are go. She said she's escalating to the "senior tech team" to resolve the software issue and they should contact me in 3-5 days. I'm not holding my breath, but we'll see.

Posted
Well, my saga with Onstar continues with no real end in sight. Pressed the blue On* button again tonight and waited about 7 minutes for them to answer. This time they answered "Thank you for contacting the Onstar navigation center. Where would you like to go today?" That's a new one - I don't even have the directions & connections plan. So I told them I needed tech assistance and they transferred me. Got a very nice lady who tried to once again activate my service with new phone number. She finally gave up and after about 15 minutes of beeping and phone ringing sounds came back on the line.

 

What she said was interesting, to say the least. She said that she was unable to get it activated and thinks it's because of a software problem on their end. She said "I don't think it's a hardware problem" - unlike the other techs I've spoken to who immediately blamed the hardware even though my On* light is green indicating that all systems are go. She said she's escalating to the "senior tech team" to resolve the software issue and they should contact me in 3-5 days. I'm not holding my breath, but we'll see.

 

Is it just me or is this absolutely insane considering we are just trying to add BT functionality to our GM vehicles and that very BT functionality that On* is blocking is actually for increased safety and often required by law?

 

So perhaps safety ISNT the primary objective of On* then.

Posted
Is it just me or is this absolutely insane considering we are just trying to add BT functionality to our GM vehicles and that very BT functionality that On* is blocking is actually for increased safety and often required by law?

 

So perhaps safety ISNT the primary objective of On* then.

 

I think you're missing what the real problem is here. OnStar is not blocking BT functionality, they're blocking Gen8 OnStar being installed in vehicles originally equipped with Gen7. There is no law anywhere that says you must use this method of hands-free phone in the vehicle; we're just going after full OE-style integration and there are some software issues that need to be handled in order to prevent it.

 

You're blaming OnStar for the wrong part of the problem.

Posted
Is it just me or is this absolutely insane considering we are just trying to add BT functionality to our GM vehicles and that very BT functionality that On* is blocking is actually for increased safety and often required by law?

 

So perhaps safety ISNT the primary objective of On* then.

 

I think you're missing what the real problem is here. OnStar is not blocking BT functionality, they're blocking Gen8 OnStar being installed in vehicles originally equipped with Gen7. There is no law anywhere that says you must use this method of hands-free phone in the vehicle; we're just going after full OE-style integration and there are some software issues that need to be handled in order to prevent it.

 

You're blaming OnStar for the wrong part of the problem.

 

 

I have to agree somewhat, Charlie - at least with respect to my last 2 calls with Onstar. Onstar actually appears to be making a good faith effort to solve my problem and keep me as a customer at this point. The tech last night was not being obstructive at all - she just honestly couldn't figure out how to solve the problem, so she escalated it.

 

Again, I'm not holding my breath - the "senior tech team" may well come back with the same same pap about the hardware being wrong for your vehicle and if you don't take it back to the dealer your vehicle will automatically self-destruct blah blah blah. If that happens, my journey probably ends and I'll just have to drop Onstar.

Posted
Is it just me or is this absolutely insane considering we are just trying to add BT functionality to our GM vehicles and that very BT functionality that On* is blocking is actually for increased safety and often required by law?

 

So perhaps safety ISNT the primary objective of On* then.

 

I think you're missing what the real problem is here. OnStar is not blocking BT functionality, they're blocking Gen8 OnStar being installed in vehicles originally equipped with Gen7. There is no law anywhere that says you must use this method of hands-free phone in the vehicle; we're just going after full OE-style integration and there are some software issues that need to be handled in order to prevent it.

 

You're blaming OnStar for the wrong part of the problem.

 

 

 

I get that but IMO an OEM solution is always best choice and On* is blocking our ability to choose OEM. The legal requirement of Bluetooth handsfree cell-phone use has only been in the last few years and back in 2006 when the engineers were working on the 07/08 On* systems there probably wasn't the demand for BT like there is today.

 

Someone at GM/On* decided to integrate BT into the G8 On* module rather then make it separate.

 

If they don't want 07/08 vehicles to use Gen8 VCIM's then providing another OEM option is better then simply saying no. Delphi makes an OEM aftermarket BT module but they will only sell it to automakers and GM denies it exists.

 

http://delphi.com/manufacturers/auto/enter...oth_con_device/

 

If there are significant software issues using Gen8 VCIM's in 07/08 models then tell us that and then we will look for an aftermarket solution close to OEM. I just don't believe these software issues exist because there are too many 07/08 owners who have done the swap and have full functionality.

 

If the issue is money, and wanting to keep 07/08 owners on the On* Handsfree Calling System where they charge the for minutes I think most of us even with BT would keep a few hundred minutes in the account just to cover times when our hand held device coverage was weak or non existent.

 

I have to give the GM engineers credit because the OEM Gen8 BT solution is very well done, so much so that Im willing to give up On* just to keep it.

Posted
Again, I'm not holding my breath - the "senior tech team" may well come back with the same same pap about the hardware being wrong for your vehicle and if you don't take it back to the dealer your vehicle will automatically self-destruct blah blah blah. If that happens, my journey probably ends and I'll just have to drop Onstar.

 

With any luck, the senior team will be able to develop a new software calibration that will officially make their system play nice with Gen8 in our vehicles; and if that does happen, it will do nothing but make it much easier for all of us to get things up and running.

 

It will be very interesting to see what they come back with; the last conversation I had with OnStar, where they did the same thing they tried doing for you (assigning a new phone number), I didn't get the impression that they were going to be able to escalate it, but I might have to try again and push more. If the senior team sees more than one ticket in their queue dealing with the same problem, it might give them extra motivation to get things working.

 

Either way, I've talked to my dealer again and assuming nothing else comes up to keep me away, I'll be going in again Friday to have them run ONSA on my truck again, and we'll just have to see what happens.

Posted
I get that but IMO an OEM solution is always best choice and On* is blocking our ability to choose OEM. The legal requirement of Bluetooth handsfree cell-phone use has only been in the last few years and back in 2006 when the engineers were working on the 07/08 On* systems there probably wasn't the demand for BT like there is today.

 

OnStar isn't blocking our ability to choose OEM; no one is keeping you from trading your vehicle in on a 2009/2010 that comes with this functionality from the factory. We're looking for factory-style integration in our older vehicles, yes, but we're also attempting to use parts in a manner other than the way they were originally designed. To expect everything to work perfectly right out of the box is really kind of unreasonable in a situation such as this.

 

Someone at GM/On* decided to integrate BT into the G8 On* module rather then make it separate.

 

And logically so, if you ask me. Nearly every bit of the telematics in GM vehicles up to this point have been integrated into the OnStar VCIM; from an engineering perspective it makes far more sense to add new features to the existing telematic infrastructure than to reinvent the wheel by making the bluetooth function separate.

 

If they don't want 07/08 vehicles to use Gen8 VCIM's then providing another OEM option is better then simply saying no. Delphi makes an OEM aftermarket BT module but they will only sell it to automakers and GM denies it exists.

 

Again, see above. It would be far more costly and difficult to have this one function in a separate module than to simply add it to what already exists. Not to mention that when it comes right down to it, there are actually very few people who would actually go back to their GM dealers to buy a kit to add bluetooth to their older vehicles. Generally speaking if people are going to purchase genuine GM accessories for their vehicles they're going to do so when purchasing it new, not 2-3 years after the fact. After that point, most people will seek aftermarket solutions instead simply because they cost less on average and are more flexible than sticking with OE solutions.

 

Those of us on this and other sites who are going about this the way we are actually are in the minority.

 

If there are significant software issues using Gen8 VCIM's in 07/08 models then tell us that and then we will look for an aftermarket solution close to OEM. I just don't believe these software issues exist because there are too many 07/08 owners who have done the swap and have full functionality.

 

Really? Where are they?

 

You even said yourself that the folks who have full functionality are driving around in 07-08 vehicles that OnStar believes are 09s. That, to me, isn't truly full functionality. If OnStar were aware that the vehicle was an 07-08, THAT would be full functionality.

 

If the issue is money, and wanting to keep 07/08 owners on the On* Handsfree Calling System where they charge the for minutes I think most of us even with BT would keep a few hundred minutes in the account just to cover times when our hand held device coverage was weak or non existent.

 

Fully agreed. I want the handsfree calling system to work mainly because I have my cell service through AT&T (GSM network) and OnStar uses Verizon (CDMA network). That way, when one service gets no signal, I should still theoretically be able to connect with the other.

 

:(

Posted

I have an 09 Bluetooth VCIM in my 07 SD and I have full functionality with OnStar. I purchased mine as a used module and after a few hurdles everything is working....

Posted
I have an 09 Bluetooth VCIM in my 07 SD and I have full functionality with OnStar. I purchased mine as a used module and after a few hurdles everything is working....

 

Meaning OnStar is fully aware that you've got an 07 SD when you call in?

 

I think you got extremely lucky.... you're the only one I've heard actually say they've got 100% integration working in a GMT900.

Posted

So THERE IS a possibility of having full integration!?!?! This may be the first...if not and you have full function as well, please pipe up and let us know what & how..

Posted
I have an 09 Bluetooth VCIM in my 07 SD and I have full functionality with OnStar. I purchased mine as a used module and after a few hurdles everything is working....

 

Meaning OnStar is fully aware that you've got an 07 SD when you call in?

 

I think you got extremely lucky.... you're the only one I've heard actually say they've got 100% integration working in a GMT900.

 

 

That's really what I was getting at. If it works for one GMT900 without any issues then it will work for all.

 

Again proving it's not a technical issue making this hard, it's a policy.

Posted
Again proving it's not a technical issue making this hard, it's a policy.

 

I disagree. I still think it IS a technical issue, and the real problem is that the workaround simply isn't well known to the members of the technical team. It's luck of the draw if you get a representative that can successfully make it work or not. If this were a policy driven issue, they wouldn't even be willing to try doing anything once they realized what was going on.

 

I don't understand why many people around here are so quick to diss GM and its subsidiaries for "bad business practices and policies" when something technical isn't simple to deal with. They're not trying to screw people, they're just not used to dealing with folks using their parts and systems in ways they weren't designed to be used in.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Monday looks like a good day for the dealer to test an ac issue. Hopefully it all turns out good.
    • Paid $2.72 for E85 today.
    • Welcome back! No, it definitely doesn't pass the sniff test. Even "ceasefire" needs an alternative definition these days.    $5.29 at Kroger today
    • That makes sense, and I think you are describing the real product problem. Capturing data is the easy part. If the owner or technician has to manually dig through five minutes of millisecond-level logs, the product has already failed. The device would be at the ECM harness, not at the OBD port, so I agree that data retrieval and event marking need to be thought through carefully. The way I am thinking about the architecture is: The recorder itself should not depend on a phone, app, Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, or cloud connection to capture the event. It should always keep a local rolling buffer and lock the event locally. A button, phone app, or small cabin device would only act as an event marker. If the driver feels a stumble and presses the button 10–30 seconds later, the pre-buffer has to already contain the useful data. For data retrieval, the practical options would be a sealed service USB lead, Wi-Fi download, or a phone/cabin companion device. I would not expect the owner to remove the ECM-side module or work with raw files directly. The cloud or AI side would be for interpretation, not for capturing the event. The truck may have no connection when the issue happens, so the evidence has to be saved locally first. After that, cloud processing could help decode the data, compare it against baselines, and generate a readable report. For the first version, I would keep the automatic triggers conservative and objective: driver event marker bus-off error passive voltage drop / brownout device reset FIFO or queue overflow a normally periodic message disappearing side-to-side communication mismatch, if the topology supports that For “learning normal,” I agree with your point, but I would not want to overclaim it as automatic root-cause diagnosis at first. A realistic first step would be learned baseline comparison for that specific vehicle and operating condition. For example, a value would only be compared against similar conditions: RPM range load / MAP throttle position gear / vehicle speed coolant and oil temperature battery voltage AFM/DFM state, if decoded and validated Then the report could flag things like: this periodic message disappeared compared with its normal timing this value deviated from this vehicle’s normal range under similar conditions the same abnormal pattern repeated after the same type of event the anomaly occurred together with voltage, oil-pressure, misfire, or communication changes But I would still call that “abnormal pattern detected,” not “replace this part,” unless there is enough validated repair data behind it. So the intended product would not be “here is a huge log.” It would need to be an event package: what triggered the capture how much pre/post data was preserved what changed before and after the event whether the device itself reset, overflowed, or saw a bus error selected graphs around the event raw data only as supporting evidence From your perspective, what would make this kind of report useful instead of just another datalog? For example: What are the top 5 parameters or events you would want highlighted first? Would you trust a learned baseline for that specific vehicle, or would you prefer fixed thresholds? How much false-positive flagging would be acceptable before you stopped looking at the reports? What would a one-page report need to show for an independent shop to take it seriously? For misfire, AFM/DFM, oil pressure, or U-code complaints, what would you want the tool to flag automatically?
    • 2024 Silverado 2500 HD LTZ grille no camera Parts list   84603331 84913656 84913657 84913654 84913655 84911567 84911568 85646092 85646093 85797921 85797922   11570637  x10-15   grille/bumper bolts 11546500  x10      grille clips 11571006  x10      push/retainer clips 11546454  x6       nut retainers 11611609  x6       M5 bolts 11610700  x6       molding/trim retainers
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...